Re: apiths = chimp & gorilla relatives
- From: "Marc Verhaegen" <fa204466@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2005 22:08:34 +0200
"Andrew Nowicki" <andrew@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:434237AF.22D30FC@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Homo is a very common and a very successful genus. Its ancestors certainly
had many of its traits, so they were common species as well.
Not necessarily. In fact, genetic variation between human populations is
many times less that that between chimp populations.
> If the Apiths are not the ancestors of Homo, then we have to explain why
we could not find any bones of Homo ancestors.
But we find fossil Homo (rudolfensis) from probably at least c 2.4 Ma (not
so long after the H/P split). And of Orrorin c 6 Ma it's impossible to say
whether it belong to H or to P. Besides, retroviral data suggest H might
have been absent from Africa between 4 & 3 Ma (CT Yohn cs.2005
"Lineage-Specific Expansions of Retroviral Insertions within the Genomes of
African Great Apes but Not Humans and Orangutans" PLoS Biol.3:1-11).
> It is much easier to explain the big difference between the bones of Homo
and the Apiths. Homo was a bipedal runner...
??
Certainly not: erectus had much thicker bones than all other primates,
living & extinct. Cursorials are lightly-built of course.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: apiths = chimp & gorilla relatives
- From: Andrew Nowicki
- Re: apiths = chimp & gorilla relatives
- References:
- Re: apiths = chimp & gorilla relatives (Re: Savanna nonsense
- From: Rich Travsky
- Re: apiths = chimp & gorilla relatives
- From: Andrew Nowicki
- Re: apiths = chimp & gorilla relatives (Re: Savanna nonsense
- Prev by Date: Re: A keeper from Marc Re: eating sharks EGGS by baboons
- Next by Date: Re: Beyond the Savanna Mentality
- Previous by thread: Re: apiths = chimp & gorilla relatives
- Next by thread: Re: apiths = chimp & gorilla relatives
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|